Trajectories in quantitative and humanities self-efficacy during the first year of college

Han, Jaeyun; Usher, Ellen L.; Brown, Christia Spears

doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102054

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a systematic review Honicke and Broadbent (2016 p. 77) found that academic self-efficacy "…correlated with academic performance only from the mid-point of a subject onward". A recent study (Han et al 2021) also emphasizes the positive link between academic self-efficacy and performance. The changes in domain-specific self-efficacy seem to indicate that unpredictable failures affect motivation negatively (Haynes 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Motivation and Performance of First-year Students

Roozen,

Goeman,

Grez

2024

HES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adjusting to academic life and managing to perform well at university is challenging for any first-year student. One of the keys to study success is motivation. In line with the social cognitive approach, two motivational constructs are considered: self-efficacy and attribution. Previous studies predominantly took a ‘snapshot’ of first year students' motivation, thereby ignoring the fact that students re-evaluate their self-efficacy as they experience success and failure over time. It is believed that a better understanding of such changes might inform targeted interventions. This case study investigated the development of self-efficacy beliefs and attribution among first-year students in an Economics undergraduate program. One hundred and four students completed three questionnaires at the start of their first academic year, two months later and after they received the results of their first semester exams. Repeated multivariate tests were conducted in order to analyse significant differences in self-efficacy and attribution scores over time. The results suggest that unsuccessful students hold unrealistic self-efficacy beliefs about courses that are new to them. Furthermore, attributions were dependent on the course involved and on students’ exam results. As a consequence, it is suggested to organize early detection and to provide feedback in order to render these beliefs more truthful.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Motivation and Performance of First-year Students

Roozen,

Goeman,

Grez

2024

HES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The present study conceptualized college self-efficacy as a domain-general construct focused on coursework-related beliefs. However, research in postsecondary contexts has shown that self-efficacy beliefs may be domain-specific, with some studies revealing an increase in self-efficacy over the course of a semester among first-year college students (e.g., biology self-efficacy: Ainscough et al, 2016; quantitative and humanities self-efficacy: Han et al, 2021). Future research could extend our findings by examining how change over time in students' intelligence mindset beliefs relates to academic performance and academic self-efficacy beliefs as a function of different majors or areas of study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, internal consistency was very low (Cronbach's alpha = .19), indicating that averaging the scores of the four subject areas was not an appropriate method for assessing general perceived academic self-competence. Therefore, we examined perceived self-competence in reading and writing combined (Cronbach's alpha = .71), and math and science combined (Cronbach's alpha = .61), to align with recent work examining self-efficacy in humanities and quantitativefocused majors separately (Han et al, 2021). In summary, assessing different aspects of academic outcomes, such as GPA, academic self-efficacy, and perceived academic standing, somewhat mitigated our reliance on self-reported measures in the current study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining associations between intelligence mindset, mental health symptom severity, and academic self-efficacy and performance

Kim

Karr

2023

Curr Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals possess different beliefs regarding the malleability of intelligence, also known as intelligence mindsets. Despite evidence demonstrating a link between a growth mindset of intelligence-the belief that intelligence can develop through effort-and academic achievement, this link has not been closely examined from a mental health perspective. Given the increasing prevalence of mental health conditions, such as anxiety and depression, among undergraduate students, an important question is whether the well-established link between mental health symptom severity and academic outcomes depends on the intelligence mindset beliefs that individuals possess. A growth mindset of intelligence might buffer the negative impact of anxiety and depression on academic outcomes, whereas a fixed mindset-the belief that intelligence cannot be changed-might exacerbate this negative relationship. The present study examined data collected from 660 undergraduate psychology students in the United States to test whether intelligence mindset beliefs moderated the relationship between mental health symptom severity and various indicators of academic outcomes: academic self-efficacy, GPA, and perceived academic standing. Results revealed that intelligence mindset beliefs did not moderate the observed negative association between mental health symptom severity and academic outcomes. Findings indicate that promoting a growth mindset of intelligence might not be a particularly effective strategy for buffering university students from the negative impact of anxiety and depression on academic outcomes. However, this conclusion is limited by the cross-sectional design of the study, and future prospective research is necessary to further clarify the relationship between intelligence mindset, mental health, and academic outcomes.

show abstract

“…Cognition refers to the acquisition of knowledge through mental activity (e.g., forming concepts, perceptions, judgments, or imagination; Colling et al, 2022). Learners' thinking, beliefs, and feelings will affect how they behave (Han et al, 2021). Analogically speaking, discipline cognition refers to an individual's understanding of their discipline's backgrounds and knowledge (Flynn et al, 2021).…”

Section: Core Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructing a critical thinking evaluation framework for college students majoring in the humanities

Tang

Geng

et al. 2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionEducation for sustainable development (ESD) has focused on the promotion of sustainable thinking skills, capacities, or abilities for learners of different educational stages. Critical thinking (CT) plays an important role in the lifelong development of college students, which is also one of the key competencies in ESD. The development of a valuable framework for assessing college students’ CT is important for understanding their level of CT. Therefore, this study aimed to construct a reliable self-evaluation CT framework for college students majoring in the humanities.MethodsExploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and Item analysis were conducted to explore the reliability and validity of the CT evaluation framework. Six hundred and forty-two college students majoring in the humanities were collected. The sample was randomly divided into two subsamples (n1 = 321, n2 = 321).ResultsThe Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the whole scale was 0.909, and the values of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for individual factors of the scale ranged from 0.724 to 0.878. Then CFA was conducted within the scope of the validity study of the scale. In this way, the structure of the 7-factor scale was confirmed. Results indicated that the constructed evaluation framework performed consistently with the collected data. CFA also confirmed a good model fitting of the relevant 22 factors of the college students’ CT framework (χ2/df = 3.110, RMSEA = 0.056, GFI = 0.927, AGFI = 0.902, NFI = 0.923, and CFI = 0.946).DiscussionThese findings revealed that the CT abilities self-evaluation scale was a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the CT abilities of college students in the humanities. Therefore, the college students’ CT self-evaluation framework included three dimensions: discipline cognition (DC), CT disposition, and CT skills. Among them, CT disposition consisted of motivation (MO), attention (AT), and open-mindedness (OM), while CT skills included clarification skills (CS), organization skills (OS), and reflection (RE). Therefore, this framework can be an effective instrument to support college students’ CT measurement. Consequently, some suggestions are also put forward regarding how to apply the instrument in future studies.

show abstract

Trajectories in quantitative and humanities self-efficacy during the first year of college

Cited by 7 publications

References 59 publications

Motivation and Performance of First-year Students

Motivation and Performance of First-year Students

Examining associations between intelligence mindset, mental health symptom severity, and academic self-efficacy and performance

Constructing a critical thinking evaluation framework for college students majoring in the humanities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About